Aging Per Se Does Not Influence Glucose Homeostasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of age on glucose metabolism by examining 1) glucose metabolism in young and middle-aged subjects when total or regional adiposity is taken into account and 2) in vitro glucose transport in adipose tissue explants from young and middle-aged women paired for total and abdominal adiposity. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Study 1: body composition, subcutaneous abdominal and visceral adipose tissue areas, and fasting and oral glucose-stimulated glucose and insulin were measured in 84 young and 81 middle-aged men and in 110 young and 91 middle-aged women. Study 2: glucose uptake in subcutaneous abdominal and visceral adipose tissue explants were measured in eight young and eight middle-aged women. RESULTS: Study 1: young and middle-aged men showed similar subcutaneous abdominal tissue area, whereas fat mass and visceral adipose tissue were greater in middle-aged than in young men (P < 0.01). Fat mass and subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissue areas were greater in middle-aged as compared with young women (P < 0.01). Fasting plasma glucose and the glucose response to an oral glucose tolerance test were significantly higher in middle-aged than in young men and women (P < 0.001). Statistical control for visceral adipose tissue area eliminated the difference seen in glucose response in men and women. Study 2: glucose transport in subcutaneous and omental adipose tissue did not differ between young and middle-aged women. CONCLUSIONS: 1) Visceral obesity, more than age per se, correlates with glucose intolerance in middle-aged subjects; 2) aging does not influence in vitro adipose tissue glucose uptake.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".